Posted on 07/11/2013 4:59:59 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
Today, July 11th, is DAY #23 (of 5th week) State of Florida V. George Zimmerman case.
Yesterday the defense rested its case. A legal analysis via Professor Jacobson HERE.
From my perspective the entire case ended, as expected, early in the day yesterday when Judge Nelson gave George Zimmerman his personal Platinum Express DCA Acquittal Card. The ruling, and more importantly the legal determination she used on the ruling, regarding the Trayvon Martin phone evidence was an immediate Nuclear DCA option. Nelson essentially ruled against admissibility based on ”authentication”. She could have kept it out under other legal reasoning, but no, she chose the one without the slightest chance of being upheld by a District Court of Appeals. IMHO this was intentional and aligns itself with the way she has ruled during the pre-trial discovery phase, and during the case itself. She’s a rigid ideologue, but she’s not stupid – this was intentional.
By ruling the phone records (texts and pics from Trayvon) cannot be “authenticated” to have originated by the specific personage of Trayvon Martin just gave the dismissal of the case to George Zimmerman with a bow on it.
As it was carefully explained to me, the phone is like a bucket. The data inside the phone is like marbles in a bucket. Some marbles from calls, others from pictures, others from texts, etc. The State brought the bucket into court – and validated the bucket contents with their own witness from the phone company – Both the State and the defense then began arguing their case around the phone call marbles in the bucket – Primarily with Rachel Jeantel. But no-one challenged the bucket itself. The State authenticated the bucket and the content of the bucket during the introduction.
The defense picks up the same bucket the state hands them, and now begins to use the contents – texts and pictures – and then Nelson rules the bucket itself cannot be authenticated. It doesn’t work that way.
If the state authenticates evidence, it cannot be divided and only authentic when the state holds it, but not the defense. Flawed logic – ABSOLUTELY positioned to give such a prejudicial outcome, the appeal would result in dismissal, not retrial. Nelson gave the case away to George Zimmerman.
She could have ruled on relevance, admissibility, or other factors – but she chose the one destined to fail, “authentication”. She gave it away.
In other news, people are catching on to the Eric Holder, Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Community Relations Service – being the actual puppeteers behind the entire construct of the false case. To them we say “welcome to the party pal“.
Basically overruled
A tape was played during the testimony phase on which Zimmerman had given a statement that night as to what happened.
There’s also audio recordings presented of Z on the phone with the dispatcher right before T attacked him...
No, I think in hell, Bernie talks for three...
It appears that he was waiting for the police; the operator asked him for the address so the police would know where to go; and when Zimmerman got out to check the address, he was ambushed by Trayvon.
So, once attacked, what would you do then? Still wait for the police?
Somebody tell BLDR that in order to sell BS you have to first sound like you’re buying it.
Right there he said nothing about touching gun.......he went for gun.
Ref your post to race, I discovered that you can’t reason with a crazy man. . .he is just now posting today on the subject. He clearly had not followed the case nor paid attention to the facts.
So, either he is an uninformed commenter or he is being deliberately acting trollish . . .or both.
Heard this from many sources. At worst a hung jury.
True . . . I did not go back inside and slaughter the family.
Did the dispatcher tell Zimmerman not to follow T? What did dispatcher tell Z?
If cops were on the way . . . all Z needed to do was keep T in view. Right?
It’s supposedly an exception to the hearsay rule
Called the “dying declaration”....
EXCEPT, I don’t see how that’s acceptable, because the way I was taught was that in order for it to be a dying declaration, the decedent has to KNOW or reasonably believe they are about to die.
Martin had no idea.
"Your honor, I object to BDLR mishandling my clients gun. Tommorrow he will be acquitted and will need it immediately after acquittal".
Isn’t he slated to do just that?
Ok, that looks cartoonish.
The color of the sky in their world certainly isn't blue or gray. And all it will take is one tiny spark to ignite their rage.
That said, such seems to be the goal of Obama, Holder, Sharpton et al.
WTF TV. jury taking a few notes but all eyes on state prosecutor.
While your head is being smashed on the concrete? You'd just wait for the police? Even if you could stop him from smashing your head in, you wouldn't? You'd wait for somebody else to come handle it for you?
Somebody posted Bernie 2 and Guy 1.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.